ML20117J322
| ML20117J322 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Duane Arnold, 05000000 |
| Issue date: | 07/31/1982 |
| From: | INSTITUTE OF NUCLEAR POWER OPERATIONS |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20114F819 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-84-44 NUDOCS 8505150056 | |
| Download: ML20117J322 (38) | |
Text
_.-
1981 Evaluation l
c m
,J Ja,e A
.o c E ~.6 'CV Ce ter s'
OWa : ec:ric
_igT:anC 0Wer 3
Comaany Y
h
\\
QF
/
1O e 8505150056 841121
$ TEN'a 44 PDR
)
t t
c e
EVALUATION of DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER Iowa Electric Light and Power Company
.~.
C July 1982 i
DUANE ARNOLD (1986 PageO
SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION e
~
The Institute of Nuclear Power Operations UNPO) conducted its first evaluatiot of Iowa Electric Light ar.d Power Company's QE) Duane Arnold Energy Centd (DAEC) nuclear generating plant during the weeks of July 13 and July 20, 1981 Electric boiling water reacter plant.Duane Arnold Energy Cente The station is located near Cedar Rapids; Iowa, on the Cedar River. The plant began commercial operation in June 1974. '
PURPOSE AND SCOPE INPO conducted an evaluation of site activities to mak of plant operating safety, evaluate management systems an identify areas needing improvement. Information was e.ssembled from discus sions, interviews, observations, and reviews of plant documents.
The INPO evaluation team examined station organization and administration-training, operations, maintenance, radiological and chemistry activ technical supp;rt. Corporate activities were not included in the scope of th evaluation, except as an incidental pa.-t of the station evaluation. As a basis fog 8
the evaluation,INPO used performance objectives and c.-iteria relevant to eachr of the six areas examined; these were applied and evaluated in light of both thG experience of team members and INPO's. observations of good practices withiT the industry.
INPO's goal is to assist member utilities in achieving the highest standards o2 excellence in all phases of nuclear plant operation. Accordingly, the conditions found in each area were compared to best practices, rather than to minimum acceptable conditions or requirements.
DETERMINATION e
C t
e c
4
~
DUANE ARNOLD (19[
Page C
The evaluation staff appreciates the cooperation received from alllevels of q Iowa Electric Light and Power Company.
E. P. Wilkinson President o
.q
~
DUANE ARNOLD (1981)
Paga 3 6
IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT AND POWER COMPANY 5
Response Summary 2
Iowa Electric Light and Power Company is pleased that the INPO Evaluation '
Team found the Duane Arnold Energy Center (DAEC) to be operated in a safe e That finding supports Company operational assessments made on a '
manner.
continuing basis since the DAEC became operational more that seven years ago.
The Company generally agrees with INPO findings. It is fully committed to.
continuing programs to achieve the highest standards of excellen::e in operation #
and administration.
1 Iowa Electric appreciates the efforts of the INPO evaluation staff in carrying out a complete evaluation in a highly professional manner.
Targeted completion dates for specific items have been noted in the details section where possible.
c>
e d
~
DUANE ARNOLD (1981) '
Page 4 4
DETAILS 5
This portion of the report includes the detailed findings. It is composed of.six d
sections, one for each of the major evaluation areas. Each section is headed by a i
summary describing the scope of the evaluation and the overall finding in that The summary is followed by the specific' findings, recommendations, and
~
area.
utility responses related to each of INPO's evaluation procedures. Items listed in Category II relate to criteria not included in INPO procedures, but are generally recognized as desirable, accepted techniques of industry and management. The evaluation procedures that were used are listed in the ADMINISTRATIVE APPENDIX.
3 ORGANIZATION AND ADMINISTRATION Seven performance areas were evaluated using current INPO criteria. The areas included objectives, organization structure, manpower resources, administrative controls, quality programs, equipment surveillance, and industrial safety.
ORG ANIZATIONAL OBJECTIVES
~
(INPO-Procedure OA.1)
An evaluation was performed to determine how effectively goals and objectives are disseminated throughout alllevels of the station and how effective they are in conveying intended operational and maintenance directions. Areas reviewed included specific goals in use, management goals issued to all personnel,-
measurement of goals and objectives attainment, and methods used to evaluate the performance of individuals.
1.
Finding (Criteria A through D)
Recommendation i
1 t
.J 9
e-
--,---,.-r,-.-
.r-.-
y..,-.
_.,,.m,m..e,-_,,--,-..-
- -. ~.,,, _,,.,
,,-e,...,,---..
?
DUANE ARNOLD (1981)
Page5 2.
Finding (Criterion E)
?
4 Recommendation d
Response
=
ORGANIZATION STRUCTURE (INPO Procedure OA.2)
The evaluation team examined the plant organization to determine if it supports safe and efficient operation of the station. The team looked into the responsi-bilities, authorities, and accountabilities of staff positions to determine if they are clearly defined, well understood, compatible with each other, and if excessive burdens 'were placed on any individuals.
They also reviewed the staffing levels to determine if sufficient, qualified people are available to provide backups for management personnel and to prevent excessive overtime.
c Finding (Criterion B)
Recommendation nesponse MANPOWER RESOURCES (INPO Procedure OA.3)
C An evaluation was performed to determine if qualified individuals were available Areas reviewed to operate and maintain the plant safely and efficiently.
included written qualification requirements for each plant staff position, policies for ensuring every position is filled by individuals meeting qualification require-ments, and periodic reviews and revisions of these qualification requirements.
DUANE ARNOLD (1988 PIga@
5 Finding i=
3 ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROLS T
GNPO Procedure OA.4)
An evaluation was performed to determine the effectiveness of the controls f5 administrative functions.
Areas reviewed included completeness, flexibilitg level of administrative actions, and effectiveness of the administrative controD programs.
Finding MANAGEMENT QUALITY PROGRAMS (INPO Procedure OA.5)
An evaluation was performed to determine if quality programs were in effect t provide sufficient accomplishment of plant and ecmpany missiens.
Ater reviewed included mana;;ement egn rels; a;;reved quality assurance and quali-centrol programs and organizaticns, self-suditing capability, and effectiveness e the programs and corrective actions.
1.
Finding (Criterion A)
Recommendation Response.
1 2.
Finding (Criterion M 1
~
Recommendation e
9 W
s.
DUANE ARNOLD (19Q PageJ
Response
.I Y
'l
_J k
SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM (INPO Procedure OA.6)
An evaluation was performed to determine if a surveillance program existed th accomplished the required surveillance inspection and testing. Areas review included procedures that address all areas of surveillance, acceptance criter out-of-range reporting requirements, timely completion requirements, mana.
ment control systems, and actions to correct deficiencies.
Finding (Criterion D)
Recommendation
Response
INDUSTRIAL SAFETY (INPO Procedure OA.7)
The on-site industrial safety program was evaluated to determine if plG policies and practices provide a safe working environment for all personnel the plant.
Finding (Criterion B) t
}
Recommendation
~
DUANE ARNOLD (1981)
Page 8
Response
C d
o 66 e e
e e
O g
l 9
l 4
J d
'A
/-
DUANE ARNOLD (1981)
Page 9 (
TRAINING AND QUALIFICATIONS Evaluations were conducted to determine the effectiveness of the training:
organization and administration; the adequacy of training facilities and equip -
ment; and the effectiveness of licensed and non-licensed operator, shift techni e cal advisor, and maintenance training activities.
Strengths were noted in the sixth operations shift dedicated to training and in, the ongoing effort to improve lesson plans. Areas needing improvement are,i delineated below, TRAINING ORGANIZATION (INPO Procedure TQ.1)
An evaluation was performed to determine if a clearly defined training organiza-tion exists that is staffed with qualified personnel capable of accomplishing all assigned training tasks.
Finding (Criterion B)
Recommendation
]
~
']
Response
l
\\
TRAINING ADMINISTRATION
.(INPO Procedure TQ.2)
An evaluation was performed to determine if the activities necessary to in and control personnel qualification programs are accomplished in a well-defined, coordinated, and effective manner.
Finding; C
+
W
DUANE ARNOLD (1981)
Page 10 s
TR11NING FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT (INPO Procedure TQ.3)
An evaluation was performed to determine if sufficient training facilities,-
equipment, and materials exist for development and evaluation of knowledge and I
skills needed by plant personnel.
Finding (Criteria A and D)
Recommendation
Response
NON-LICENSED OPERATOR TRAINING (INPO Procedure TQ.4)
An evaluation was performed to determine if an effective program exists to
^
develop.and maintain the necessary skills and knowledge for non-licensed operators to perform their assigned job functions.
~
Pindin'g (Criterion A)
Recommendation
Response
O e
p I
J
- C 9
R.
... -.... _... -... -...,......,......... -. ~.. -
DUANE ARNOLD (1981)
Page 11 i
d LICBNSED OPERATOR TRAINING QNPO Procedure TQ.5) g An evaluation was performed to determine if a program exists to develop the f
skills and knowledge necessary for licensed operators to perform their assigned i
job functions.
_~
e Finding (Criterion E)
Recommendation el
Response
1 LICENSED OPERATOR REQUALIFICATION TRAINING (INPO Procedure TQ.6)
An evaluation was performed to determine if a program exists to maintain the skills and knowledge necessary for licensed operators to perform their assigned job functions.
Finding (Criterion F)
Recommendation
Response
i SHIFT TECHNICAL ADVISOR TRAINING QNPO Procedure TQ.7)
An evaluation was ' performed to determine if a program exists to develop and maintain the ski}1s and knowledge necessary for shift technical advisors (STA) to perform their assigned job functions.
Finding (Criterion A)
T-"
~+--%
v
,n,
I DUANE ARNOLD (1981)
Pcge 12 a
Recommendation, T
h
Response
6 MAINTENANCE PERSONNEL TRAINING (INPO Procedure TQ.8)
An evaluation was performed to determine if a program exists to develop and maintain the knowledge and skills necessary for maintenance personnel to perform their assigned job functions.
Finding (Criterion A)
Recommendation t
Response
~
C I*
e t
4 9
o 9
e b
9
DUANE ARNOLD (1981)
Page 13 i
OPERATIONS c.;c Evaluation of the Operations area included actual observations of plant operation i
such as reactor startup, surveillance performance tests, shift turnovers, tagouts, and other normal evolutions. Also reviewed were the methods and contrcls for s
communicating and maintaining plant status, organization and administrative aspects, facilities and equipment, and the use and content of procedures relating to the operation of the facility. Areas where improvements can be made are deta!!ed below.
OPERATIONS ORGANIZATION AND ADMINISTRATION QNPO Procedure OP.1)
An evaluation was performed to determine the existence of a clearly defined operations organization that assigns responsibility and delegates adequate au-thority for accomplishment of required tasks. Areas reviewed included organi-zational structure, job descriptions, shift administrative assignments, written and oral instructions and orders, and miscellaneous administrative programs.
Determinations were made as follows:
Finding (Criterion A)
Recommendation
Response
OPERATIONS FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT QNPO Procedure OP.2)
An evaluation was performed to determine if plant facilities and equipment are operated and maintained in a manner that ensures safe and efficient operation.
Areas reviewed included equipment service needs, effect of the working environ-ment on safe and efficient station operation, and the adegaacy of communica-tions equipment. Determinations were made as follows:
1.
Finding (Criterion A) 3 Recommendation e
y
-,-,wev-v
-vw w
---i-saw w---.g.e
--c -y
- -. ---c---,v
-.-,-,r..%-e----,--,- - - -, --
--- -,, - - - -, - +, -
.~
DUANE ARNOLD (1981)
Page 24
Response
g
~
2.
Finding (Criterion B)
}
Recommendation
Response
CONDUCT OF ShTFT OPERATIONS (INPO Procedure OF.3)
Shif t operations were evaluated to determine if operator activities and the aids for these activities support safe and efficient operation of the station. Areas reviewed included the observation of operations, station cleanliness and order, response to abnormal conditions,logkeeping practices, reliability of control room instrumentation, and operator awareness of plant conditions. Determinations were made as follows:
1.
Finding (Criterion B)
Recommendation
Response
2.
Finding (Criterion D)
Recommendation 1
..,v,.n
~.. _.
DUANE ARNOLD (1981) '
Page 15 j
Response
3 5
.t c=
PLANT OPERATIONS PROCEDURES
~
GNPO Procedure OP.4)
An evaluation was performed to determine if procedure content and use are appropriate for conducting operations safely and reliably.
Areas reviewed included management policies for use of procedures and changes to procedures.
In addition, procedures were reviewed for clarity, continuity, identification of
" sequence required" actions, and suitable advisory information. Determinations were made as follows:
1.
Finding (Criterion B)
Recommendation
. Response d
2.
Finding (Criterion C)
Recommendation
Response
PLANT STATUS CONTROLS QNPO Procedure OP.5)
An evaluation was performed to determine if plant status controls are provided to ensure adequate equipment and system availability. Areas reviewed included management programs and policies that provide guidance for status control, actual practices in status control, responsibilities of senior licensed operators assigned to monitor and review status control, and provisions for status control-4 under special conditions (e.g., outages, accident recovery, or refueling). Deter-a i
minations were made as follows:
l W
. ~..,. -... -.. -.
.. ~ -.... -.
DUANE ARNOLD (1981)
Paga 16-t Finding (Criterion J)
~-
Recommendation t
Response
SHIFT TURNOVER (INPO Procedure OP.6)
An evaluation was performed to determine if a continuous, current understanding of station conditions is maintained at all shift positions.
Areas reviewed included programs and policies controlling shift turnover practices for individual shift positions, checklists, operating panel reviews, and review of station activities in progress or planned. Determinations were made as follows:
1.
Finding (Criteria A and C)
.u Recommendation e
Response
s 2.
Finding (Criterion B) i
?
4 E
4 l-m
DUANE ARNOLD (1981)
Prga 17
~ ~
Recommendation I
Response
d TAGOUT PRACTICES (INPO Procedure OP.7)
An evaluation was performed to determine if established tagout practices ensure.-
Areas reviewed included senior protection for personnel and station equipment. reactor ope tagged equipment for personnel safety, double verification of important or safety-related components without control room indication that are repositio during maintenance or test, tag coloring and numbering, and review of the clearance log. Determinations were made as follows:
1.
Finding (Criterion B) t e emeM
- W Recommendation
Response
~
o I
no
DUANE ARNOLD (1981)
Page 18 g
2.
Finding (Criterion F) b 8
Recommendation 1
b
Response
3.
Finding (Criterion G)
Recommendation
Response
4 e
e 9
e t
/
DUANE ARNOLD (1981)
Pega 19 MAINTENANCE The evaluation encompassed the maintenance organization, preventive mainte-nance program, work control system, maintenance history, control and ca'ibra-tion of testing equipment, procedures, and facilities and equipment.
4 4,
MAINTENANCE ORGANIZATION AND ADMINISTRATJON QNPO Procedure MA.1) j i
The maintenance organization and administrative programs were evaluated.to I
determine their effectiveness in supporting safe plant operations.
Areas reviewed included the organization structure, staff size, assignment of authori-ties and responsibilities, training, and certain administrative programs. Deter-minations were made as follows:
Finding (Criterion A)
. Recommendation
Response
t MAINTENANCE FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT QNPO Procedure MA.2) f The location, size and condition of offices, work, and storage spaces were examined. In addition, the number, type, condition, and location of maintenance tools and equipment were reviewed.
1.
Finding (Criterion A)
. ~..
i e
Recommendation
Response
~
..,, _ ~..
DUANE ARNOLD (1981)
Pcg2 20 2.
Finding (CategoryII)
Redommendation 1
Response
g WORK CONTROL SYSTEM (INPO Procedure MA.3)
The effectiveness of the work control system was evaluated.
The system functions were checked to see if they promote adequate identification of potential work; define and authorize work to be performed by the maintenance groups; provide for planning, scheduling, and control of actual work; and have a mechanism to input the maintenance results into an equipment history file for future evaluation.
1.
Finding (Criterion C)
Rt. commendation
~
~
Response
2.
Finding (Criterion F)
Recommendation Resoonse O
cm 9
E e-e o
n
,o
DUANE ARNOLD (1981) '
Page 21 3.
Finding (CategoryII)
Recommendation
Response
MAINTENANCE PROCEDURES (INPO Procedure MA.4)
The team evaluated the degree to which procedures enhance the quality and effectiveness of maintenance activities. Procedures and manuals were examined to determine the type of maintenance covered, scope, level of detail, review and approval process, and document control requirements and methods of revision.
1.
Finding (Criterion A)
Recommendation,,
Response
~
2.
Finding (Criterion F)
Recommendation 4
Resoonse k
O I
1 e
t
~...
DUANE ARNOLD (1981)
Page 22 MAINTENANCE HISTORY (INPO Procedure MA.5)
The ability of maintenance history records to support maintenance evolutions was reviewed.
Areas covered were the equipment included in maintenance
~
history, content and accessibility of records, history review and evaluation
~
methods, implementation of an equipment performance program, and procedures
~
for program implementation.
Finding (Criteria D and E)
Recommendation
Response
PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE (INPO Procedure MA.6)
The team evaluated the effectiveness of maintenance in optimizing equipment reliability and performance. The preventive maintenance (PM) program was assessed to determine if it was well defined and effectively implemented. Other areas of review included criteria used to determine the equipment to be included in the program, frequency of maintenance, effectiveness of program control, coordination, and adequacy of individual procedures.
1.
Finding (Criterion C)
Recommendation
Response
2.
Finding (Criterion D)
Recommendation 3
o 7
- ,.--.,,,-,.,--,-----,.-...--.4
---e,
DUANE ARNOLD (1981)
Paga 23
. Response e
CONTROL OF MEASUREMENT & TEST EQUIPMENT (INPO Procedure MA.7)
The team evaluated the adequacy and effectiveness of methods used for calibration and control of test equipment and instrumentation.
Specifically, methods used for identifying, calibrating, storing, issuing, transporting, and using measurement and test equipment (M&TE) were examined.
Procedures estab-lishing and governing the calibration program and existing calibration records were also reviewed.
1.
Finding (Criterion C)
Recommendation
Response
2.
Finding (Criterion D)
Response
CONTROL OF SPECIAL PROCESSES (INPO Procedure MA.8)
The qualification and c'ontrcl of personnel, procedures, equipment, and material were evaluated to ensure the quality of welding processes.
Finding c
W
.1-.
~
DUANE ARNOLD (1981)
Paga 24 RADIOLOGICAL PROTECTIOF AND CHEMISTRY Radiological protection and chemistry were evaluated by reviewing radiological I
protection training, personnel dosimetry, external and internal radiation expo-
~
sure, radioactive contamination control, and chemistry. This portion of the evaluation was primarily a review of plant programs as they function under normal (non-outage) conditions.
{
II l
l i
MANAGEMENT OF RADIOLOGICAL PROTECTION (INPO Procedure RC.1)
An evaluation was performed to determine the effectiveness of the management of the radiological protection program.
l Finding (Criterion D) 4 Recommen& ion I
i
~
.c a
e
DUANE ARNOLD (1981)
I Pags 25
Response
3 h.
-l l
RADIOLOGICAL PROTECTION TRAINING 9
QNPO Procedure RC.2)
An evaluation was performed to -determine if plant staff members have the knowledge and practical abilities to implement radiological protection practices j
effectively.
I 1.
Finding (Criterion A)
Recommendation I
i
Response
2.
Finding (Criterion B) o Recommendation I
Response
a 1
I I
I 1
J d
DUANE ARNOLD (1081)
Page 26 9
PERSONNEL DOSIMETRY UNPO Procedure RC.3)
An evaluation was performed to verify that personnel radiation exposures were y
determined and recorded accurately.
Finding (Criterion C)
~
'i Recommendation
Response
EXTERNAL RADIATION EXPOSURE (INPO Procedure RC.4)
An evaluation was performed to deter: tine if the plant was minimizing personnel externa 1 radiation exposure.
Finding (Criterion A)
Recommendation
Response
INTERNAL RADIATION EXPOSURE QNPO Procedure RC.5) f An evaluation was performed to determine if internal radiation exposure was minimized.
q
DUANE ARNOLD (1981)
Paga 27 j
Finding i=
b RADIOACTIVE EFFLUENTS
~
~ (INPO Procedure RC.6) i; Finding SOLID RADIOACTIVE WASTE (INPO Procedure RC.7)
An evaluation was performed to determine if solid radioactive waste volumes were minimized.
1.
Finding (Criteria D, E, and F) e' Recommendation
Response
2.
Finding (Criterion C)
Recommendation
Response
j o
1 Inpo Comment i
DUANE ARNOLD (1981)
Pcga 28 TRNNSPORTATION OF RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL (INPO Procedure RC.8)
An evaluation was performed to determine if the transportation of radioactive 2
material meets requirements.
Finding RADIOACTIVE CONTAMINATION CONTROL (INPO Procedure RC.9)
An evaluation was performed to determine if the plant was minimizing con-tamination of equipment and areas of the plant and to determine if personnel contaminations were minimized.
1.
Finding (Criterion A)
Recommendation
Response
1 2.
Finding (Criterion B) c j
~
DUANE ARNOLD (1981)
Page 29 Recommendation
Response
c 3.
Finding (Category II)
Recommendation
Response
CHEMISTRY (INPO Procedure RC.10)
An evaluation was performed to determine if accurate measurements are taken and if aggressive control of chemistry parameters is practiced.
1.
Finding (Criteria D and L)
Recommendation
Response
cm 2.
Finding (Crite' ion E) r 2
1
~
DUANE ARNOLD (1981) e Pega 30 d i
-e Recommen at on
Response
c 3.
Finding (Category H) w Recommendation
Response
e e
ee e
M e
ee e G
e t
O e
a m
DUANE ARNOLD (1981)
Page 31 i
TECHNICAL SUPPORT On-site engineering support was evaluated in the areas of organization and
=
administration, plant efficiency and reliability, nuclear operating experience 3
evaluation, plant modification, and reactor engineering.
The commitment to e
improving the design change request (DCR) process at the Duane Arnold Plant, as evidenced by the effort currently underway to close out completed DCR packages and the addition of an on-site design engineering staff to facilitate the DCR process, is noteworthy.
Areas where improvements can be made are detailed below.
ON-SITE TECHNICAL SUPPORT ORGANIZATION AND ADMINISTRATION (INPO Procedure TS.1)
The on-site engineerirg staff was evaluated to determine if it is capable of performing all assigned responsibilities efficiently, if a training program exists to enhance and develop the skills of engineering personnel, and if technical personnel are being utilized efficiently. Determinations were made as follows:
Finding (Criterion A)
Recommendation
Response
PLANT EFFICIENCY AND RELIABILITY (INPO Procedure TS.2) e..
Finding (Criteria A~, D, and E)
~
e e
Y 9
- w. h
~d ~
DUANE ARNOLD (1981) g Page 32
. Recommendation i
g
Response
NUCLEAR OPERATING EXPERIENCE EVALUATION PROGRAM (INPO Procedure TS.3)
An evaluation was performed of-the programs to review in-house operating events as well as those occurring throughout the nuclear Industry. The reporting, review, and follow-up corrective actions for in-house events were evaluated, along with the method of disseminating the information to appropriate parsonnel and the industry. For industrywide events, evaluation was made of the sources of information reviewed, the screening process employed in surveying events,
'and the disposition of events relevant to the plant. Determinations were made as follows: -
- 1.. Finding (Criteria A, C, D, E, G.2, and G.3) c, Recommendation Develop a~ program to handle the review and resolution of relevant industry operating experiences completely. The program should include the foHowing:
a.
b.
C.
d.
C I
Response
a
.I
DUANE ARNOLD (issf)~ ~~
Pcga 33 2.
' Finding (Criteria G.2 and G.3) 2 a.
c b.
c.
RECOMMENDATION NUMBERS SOER NUMBER Recommendation
Response
~
PLANT MODIFICATIONS (INPO Procedure TS.4)
The program for processing design change requests (DCRs) was evaluate if changes to the plant are implemented in a timely manner while mainta the quality of plant systems, structures, and components.
DCRs, prioritization, tracking, testing, verification of installation, and close of the DCR package were examined. Determinations were made as follows:
1.
Finding (Criterion C) l
/
Recominendation Response,
i e
e t
i a
DUANE ARNOLD (1981)
Page 34 i
2.
Finding (Criterion I)
Recommendation e
Response
ON-SITE REACTOR ENGINEERING (INPO Procedure TS.5)
Reactor engineering at Duane Arnold was evaluated to assess the use of appropriate procedures, the use of computer programs and changes to them, the coordination with other groups off site, the dedication to maintenance of fuel clad integrity, and the involvement of the reactor engineers in re. fueling outage activities. A determination was made as follows:
Finding (Criterion B)
Recommendation
~
Response
G e
d t
- 4 1
DUANE ARNOLD (1981[
Appendix Page1 d
ADMINISTRATIVE APPENDIX I.
Listing of Areas Evaluated ORGANIZATION AND ADMINISTRATION q
OA.1 Organizational Objectives OA.2 Organization Structure OA.3 Manpower Resources OA.4 Administrative Controls OA.5 Management Quality Programs OA.6 !,urveillance Program OA.7 Industrial Safety TRAINING AND QUALIFICATIONS TQ.1 Training Organization TQ.2 Training Administration TQ.3 Training Facilities and Equipment TQ.4 Non-Licensed Operator Training TQ.5 Licensed Operator Training TQ.6 Licensed Operator Requalification Training TQ.7 Shift Technical Advisor Training TQ.8 Maintenance Personnel Training OPERATIONS OP.1 Operations Organization and Administration OP.2 Operations Facilities and Equipment OP.3 Conduct of Shift Operations OP.4 Plant Operations Procedures OP.5 Plant Status Controls OP.6 Shift Turnover OP.7 Tagout Practices MAINTENANCE MA.1 Maintenance Organization and Administration MA.2 Maintenance Facilities and Equipment MA.3 Work Control System MA.4 Maintenance Procedures MA.5 Maintenance History MA.6 Preventive Maintenance MA.7 Control of Measurement and Test Equipment MA.8 Control of Special Processes l-
g DUANE ARNOLD (1981) 6 Appendix Page 2 RADIOLOGICAL PROTECTION AND CHEMISTRY t
RC.1 Management of Radiological Protection f
-?
RC.2 Radiological Protection Training RC.3 Personnel Dosimetry
?
RC.4 External Radiation Exposure RC.5 Internal Radiation Exposure RC.6 Radioactive Effluents RC.7 Solid Radioactive Waste RC.8 Transportation of Radioactive Material RC.9 Radioactive Contamination Control RC.10 Chemistry TECHNICAL SUPPORT TS.1 On-Site Technical Support Organization and Administration TS.2 Plant Efficiency and Reliability TS.3 Nuclear Operating Experience Evaluation Program TS.4 Plant Modifications TS.5 On-Site Reactor Engineering a-
'uhl i
es e P
G b
r r DUANE ARNOLD (1981)
AppIndix Ptga 3 t
II.
Iowa Electric Light and Power Company Personnel Contacted Chairman of the Beard and President Senior Vice-President, Energy Resources Assistant Vice-President, Nuclear Generation Division Director-Nuclear Generation Manager-Design Engineering c
Manager-Technical Services Chief Engineer-Duane Arnold Energy Center Assistant Chief Engineer-Operations Assistant Chief Engineer-Radiation Protection and Security Assistant Chief Engineer-Technical Support Supervisor-Operations Supervisor-Mechanical Maintenance Supervisor-Electrical Maintenance Assistant Supervisor-Mechanical Maintenance Assistant Supervisor-Electrical Maintenance Radiation Protection Engineer Technical Engineer Quality Assurance Engineer Reactor and Plant Performance Engineer Quality Control Supervisor Assistant Radiation Protection Engineer Radiological Engineers Shift Supervisor Engineers Nuclear Str. tion Operating Engineers
_ Assistant Nuclear Station Operating Engineers 8
Secend Assistant Operating Engineers-Auxiliary Operating Engineers Shift Technical Advisors Health Physics Supervisor.
Radiation Waste Supervisor Training Coordinator Instrumentation and Control Technicians O
c:
9 t
3
.